Top ICE Lawyer Accused Of Identity Fraud Against Detained Immigrants
from the such-a-lovely-organization dept
For many, many years we've questioned the bizarre lawless nature of ICE -- Immigration and Customs Enforcement -- going back to the days when it was illegally seizing blogs, based on false claims of copyright infringement. We questioned what ICE had to do with censoring blogs in the first place. Of course, in the last year, ICE has been getting a lot more negative attention for something that is clearly under its purview: enforcement of immigration laws. Specifically, ICE has been almost gleefully demonstrating how they are thuggish bullies who are eager to deport as many people as possible. It's disgusting and inhumane -- and if you're going to be one of those people who pop up in our comments to say something ignorant about how if someone is here illegally they have no rights and should be booted as quickly as possible, go somewhere else to spout your nonsense. Also, seriously: take stock of your own priorities and look deeply at why you are so focused on destroying the lives of people who are almost certainly less well off and less privileged than you are, and who are seeking a better way of life.
But ICE's violent, gleeful thuggery seems to come easy to the organization -- and thus it should be little surprise that one of ICE's top lawyers has been charged with identity fraud and wire fraud in trying to use the identities of at least seven immigrants who were being processed by ICE. The indictment against Raphael Sanchez, the chief counsel for ICE in Seattle is quite a read.
Beginning in or about October, 2013, and continuing until on or about October 25, 2017, in the Western District of Washington, the defendant,
RAPHAEL A. SANCHEZ,devised and intended to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud financial institutions, including American Express Company, Bank of America Corporation, Capital One Financial Corporation, Citibank, Discover Financial Services, and JPMorgan Chase Co., by using the personally identifying information of seven aliens in various stages of immigration proceedings with the United States Immigrations and Customs Enforcement to obtain money and property by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises, and in doing so, transmitted and caused to be transmitted by means of wire communications in interstate or foreign commerce, writings, signals, and email communications for the purpose of executing such scheme and artifice to defraud; including but not limited to the following email "that SANCHEZ caused to be sent via interstate wires:
April 18, 2016: Email message sent from Raphael.Sanchez@ice.dhs.gov to Raphael.Sanchez@ice.dhs.gov and Raphael_sanchez@yahoo.com, containing a Puget Sound Energy bill addressed to R.H. for service at 3516 South Webster Street #A Seattle, Washington, and an image of a United States permanent resident card and the biographical page of a Chinese passport issued to R.H., originating in Washington and utilizing email servers in West Virginia and Mississippi.
That's the wire fraud part. The identity fraud part includes:
On or about July 5, 2016, in the Western District of Washington, the defendant,
RAPHAEL A. SANCHEZ,did knowingly transfer, possess, and use, without lawful authority, a means of identification of another person, including the name, Social Security number, and birth date of R.H., a real person, during and in relation to a felony violation enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(c), to wit, wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, as charged in Count One of this Information, in violation of 18 § U.S.C. 1028A(a)(1). .
I assume as the case against Sanchez moves forward, more details will come out about what exactly happened here. But, remember, this is at the very same time as ICE is asking to be reclassified from a law enforcement agency to an intelligence agency, giving it much greater access to surveillance data -- without a warrant. Just imagine the kinds of identity fraud ICE lawyers could pull off with that access....
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: homeland security, ice, identity fraud, immigraiton, raphael sanchez, wire fraud
Reader Comments
The First Word
“my vote for Most Awesomely Good Comment
> and if you're going to be one of those people who pop up in our comments to say something ignorant about how if someone is here illegally they have no rights and should be booted as quickly as possible, go somewhere else to spout your nonsense. Also, seriously: take stock of your own priorities and look deeply at why you are so focused on destroying the lives of people who are almost certainly less well off and less privileged than you are, and who are seeking a better way of life.- Mike Masnick
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
People mistreated in custody.
People dying in custody.
People denied medical care in custody.
(For the xenophobic cheer-leading section, you might feel that familiar tingle down below but you might want to temper it with if we allow them to ignore the law regarding these people that someone might decide you don't deserve those protections when they decide you should go to jail.)
One wonders how we can trust anything coming out of this agency. It took them nearly 5 years to figure out this scheme, this isn't even a case of demanding they be held to a higher standard because of their position, this is wondering how the fsck this happened and continued unnoticed or unreported.
We really need to overhaul these systems, its not been funny for a long time. We are out dated, paying above top dollar for crappy contracts on products that were outdated 5 years before we ordered them.
How can they keep us safe from all those scary illegals, when they are to busy committing fraud, abuse, & murder?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I think we can say it's not this lawyer's fault it really is society's dont blame him or the government.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
A white man with powder cocaine gets a free massage at a spa.
A black man with rock cocaine of any amount gets federal time.
If you want to talk about the higher rates, you might have to admit that the law is biased to appease people liek you who are just mad you can't just lynch those damn darkies anymore for looking at a white girl.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Dont care they have been in this country for ALONG TIME
Dont look up personal history
DONT CARE they have paid taxes ALL THE TIME HERE..
DONT care they have family
Dont care they are PAYING BILLS..Ask the CC corps how they feel of loosing those extra payments..WHO will pay?? YOU WILL.
ASK..Who is part and parcel of this?? the DHS..look who they are overcharge of..almost EVERY USA gov. agency. WHY??
FOR ALL the police state we are, running around the world HELPING others(?) what the HELL is going on in Central and South America..and are WE AT FAULT??(I wont say yes, but WE FIXED most of the elections)
OUR COUNTRY: WROTE THIS...
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/
But do we STAND BY THIS..
WE keep screaming that WE NEED JOBS...
the Corps DONT WANT you to have jobs, they WANT MONEY..
Start asking questions on how to CREATE more Companies to COMPETE with these idiots..WE CAN IMPORT..get people together and start fighting back..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
my vote for Most Awesomely Good Comment
- Mike Masnick
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: my vote for Most Awesomely Good Comment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: my vote for Most Awesomely Good Comment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: my vote for Most Awesomely Good Comment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Journalistic Objectivity
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Journalistic
... and you regularly found them to be very bad boys. The important next logical step should be to figure out why that is.... rather than just further cataloging ICE misdeeds. Mere bean counting gets us nowhere.
Why does the ICE leadership tolerate (or encourage) such criminal behavior? Are there some fundamental problems with the ICE mission, organization, and ineffective Federal legal constraints upon it ?? (you betcha). What possible remedies exist for fixing this serious ICE problem?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Not a very clever bit of re-framing you have there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Government efficiency
I was under the impression that the current administration was trying to reduce the reach and influence of the government because our government institutions are too eager to do their job. This is an example of an agency that is not just eager to do their job but also taking steps to intimidate and mistreat some of our most vulnerable people and tear families apart. It is difficult for one to go too far by merely pointing out this kind of tyranny.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Government efficiency
That is what they say ... what they do is a different story.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If they do it in a disgusting and inhumane way, of course it is. "I was just doing my job" doesn't excuse you if you choose to do it in the worst way possible, even if you agree with the nature of the job itself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Briefly. America's torturers, and those who issued the orders, were not prosecuted.
One of those torturers, Rick Saccone, is now the GOP nominee in Pennsylvania’s 18th congressional district. He's ahead in the polls too.
Nuremburg ain't Pennsylvania.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yuck!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
... is disgusting and inhumane.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: if you're going to be one of those people
In IOW, everything; EVERYTHING can be measured in watts. Our food, our water, our air, our cozy air conditioned homes. All of those watts come from the sun, and there is only so much of it we can use without sustaining an unrecoverable ecological debt.
And once you calculate that number, if the current population is above that number, it stops being about the what, and starts being about the who.
And while I take a humanitarian view, and generally respect the principles inscribed on the statue of liberty, there is a certain amount of hypocrisy in that. I probably use my Air Conditioning too much. I drive a car more than I should. I have a black roof on my house instead of a white one. I use fertilizer on a grass lawn, which shouldn't even BE grass. I own a bunch of shit I don't need or really want.
All of those things reflect burned watts that ultimately reflect a disregard for the afore mentioned number. Consumerism is the ultimate anti-humanitarianism. And while I generally disregard fundamentalism right wing views, I can't help but think about that number every time I hear one about immigration.
If I was a betting man, I would say that number has already been reached. And if it has, that means that ALL of the worlds national economies need to be refactored with severe prejudice.
That some people are assholes about immigration is beside the point. We are all assholes. That is why they come here. They want to be assholes too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: if you're going to be one of those people
In IOW, everything; EVERYTHING can be measured in watts. Our food, our water, our air, our cozy air conditioned homes. All of those watts come from the sun, and there is only so much of it we can use without sustaining an unrecoverable ecological debt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: if you're going to be one of those people
Whooops finger trouble
In IOW, everything; EVERYTHING can be measured in watts. Our food, our water, our air, our cozy air conditioned homes. All of those watts come from the sun, and there is only so much of it we can use without sustaining an unrecoverable ecological debt.
It is way more complicated than that.
Firstly - all of those watts don't have to come from the sun. Ever heard of nuclear energy?
Secondly we are not even remotely near that limit anyway.
Thirdly - whilst you make some good points about over consumption in developed countries (of which the US is the worst by a country mile), one thing that is worth noting is that assholes (as you put it) generally don't have lots of kids - so having more assholes tends to result in a lower population.
The native populations of most of the western world are now reproducing at below replacement rates and conventional wisdom says that the immigrants will do the same once established. Of course the conventional wisdom could be wrong on this point - but the consequences don't bear thinking about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: if you're going to be one of those people
Since we do not yet have nuclear fusion you must be speaking of fission. You do realize that those heavy elements were created by other suns, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: if you're going to be one of those people
I get your point. But no, fission reactors do not solve the ecological debt problem.
"It is way more complicated than that."
Yes it is complicated. There are many many factors that have to be calculated. But it still comes down to a watts/person ratio. We are in a fishbowl, with the vacume of space instead of glass walls. If the ratios aren't right, we're fucked. You don't need to take my word on it, ask your kids goldfish.
"Secondly we are not even remotely near that limit anyway."
I disagree. We don't have to use every resource to begin a cascade failure. And we could be well into a cascade failure and not know it. Large ecological systems have buffering capacity. We don't know at this point how deep we are into that buffer, if at all. But my guess is maybe 30% of this planets reserve capacity for sustaining our species is gone.
Of course that is just a WAG. (wild ass guess) like your declaration is. I base that belief on Google maps. CO2 sequestration rates of forests are higher than industrial agricultural lands. If you consider how much previously forested land is now farm land, and consider the CO2/O2 conversion rate, we are looking at a fraction of the conversion capability that this planet had before the industrial age. And that is before we start talking about the ocean.
"the western world are now reproducing at below replacement rates"
Yes, but they are using more energy and natural resources per person than other countries. The system has to be in balance. The industrialized nations are not only completely out of balance, but they are encouraging other countries to become more out of balance as well.
The WTO is working on economic models that are not based on a wholistic ecological management viewpoint, but rather an industrial age viewpoint. This is driven largely by the fact that it is hard to measure things like CO2 sequestration rates in plants under various environmental circumstances. Yet those number are more important right now, that the market leverage you get from dumping newfangled chemicals on rice paddys.
IOW, all economists are working with bad data. The way you know that, is there isn't a thousands of environmental scientists trolling around your state employed to get good data. And the reason those guys aren't there, is that there is no consumer market demand for that data. Of course there will be when we can no longer breath. But I guess there will be a product for that. For a little while anyway.
If resources per person is R, population is P, maximum total sustainable resource output during equilibrium is S, then the maximum sustainable human population is: H = P when (R*P/S = 1).
Nobody has solved for H? Really? That would seem like the most important number on the planet, and nobody has any idea? I doubt that seriously.
To bring this back to the OP, "H" should be a public number, because it will help to contextualize immigration. "Them or us" may or may not be a valid viewpoint. We don't know. All of us would like "H" to be a bigger number than the current world population. But I doubt it is. And frankly we could afford to bring more folks on board with us, if we managed our economy with consideration for "H" in every respect.
Calling each other dicks is a complete waste of time. There is a ton of work that needs to get done to resolve our ignorance. And make no mistake, every position on this subject is rife with ignorance, including my own. I should like to correct that.
How about you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: if you're going to be one of those people
_"Secondly we are not even remotely near that limit anyway."
I disagree. We don't have to use every resource to begin a cascade failure. And we could be well into a cascade failure and not know it. Large ecological systems have buffering capacity. We don't know at this point how deep we are into that buffer, if at all. But my guess is maybe 30% of this planets reserve capacity for sustaining our species is gone.
Of course that is just a WAG. (wild ass guess) like your declaration is. _
My declaration isn't a "wild ass guess"
See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy#/media/File:Solar_land_area.png
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: if you're going to be one of those people
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: if you're going to be one of those people
Perhaps some immigrants are fleeing the third world due to rampant violence, tyranny, oppression, starvation ..... caused by first world carpet baggerz.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: if you're going to be one of those people
Most of the estimates I've read put that number around 10-12 billion and the UN predictions I've read have the human population plateauing at around 10 billion later this century. We should be fine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Of course these lacked the courage to do (1), so it's (2). Which means that they're going to have a much harder time winning elections, IF THOSE ELECTIONS ARE CONDUCTED FAIRLY.
So now they're doing everything possible to keep that from happening. In Georgia, they're trying to make all security research illegal so that nobody can find out what's wrong with voting systems. In Pennsylvania, they're threatening to impeach the state supreme court rather than fix gerrymandering. Yesterday in Washington, they eliminated the only federal agency charged with security voting systems. And so on: there really are too many of these to list here.
And then there's what ICE is doing, which is explicitly designed to intimidate anyone who's any kind of immigrant: legal, illegal, somewhere in between. The goal is to frighten people into avoiding any contact with government, especially including voter registration. Because even someone who's here legally, even someone who's become a citizen, now has to wonder if ICE goons won't show up in the middle of night and point loaded guns at their children.
You can say "they shouldn't worry" but YOU'RE NOT THEM. You're not one of the ones being targeted. And ICE is only getting started: I wouldn't be surprised at all if the plan is to have them accompany census takers in order to scare people into not responding, in order to artificially reduce the population count in some areas, in order to reduce representation of those areas in state and federal legislatures and to decrease their allocated funding.
This isn't the only initiative undertaken by the Trump administration with the same goal of tilting elections toward the GOP -- there are many others that are designed to disenfranchise and disempower -- but this one is being done with particular cruelty.
That's not an accident.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
But incredibly, he won. And out of thin air a story about Russia and Putin came out of the left saying he somehow cheated and Russia stole the election...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
And in light of compelling evidence they still say this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Once again, right-wingers cling to the opposite of reality. It doesn't take much searching to find Trump making comments about Russian hacking in 2014, and you can bet your ass that had the election gone the way the popular vote said it should, he'd be the one screaming about it now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Plenty of other countries in the world behave worse and are more of a threat to our way of life and yet "Russia" is always the bogeyman.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Because there appears to be documented evidence that they have actually done many of the things they're accused of doing? Because the mindset of ex-KGB workers and the like didn't magically change when the institutions around them fell?
I agree that they might not be the absolute number one danger, but there's not zero threat either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Threat of what exactly?
Of course the real problem is that WE really are the number one threat to THEM.
The "west" has attacked Russia, essentially unprovoked, on at least four occasions in the last 200 years (Napoleon, Crimean war, WW1, WW2) - go back further in time and you get the Baltic Crusades etc.
In return Russia has never attacked/invaded the west except during the endgame of WW2, when they were attacked first.
Try looking at things from the Russian point of view for a change.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
I'd try, but then I wouldn't be able to get the smell out of my hair for days.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
while we have
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War
(finl and)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_the_Baltic_states_(1940)
https://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_the_Baltic_states_(1944)
(a number of baltic states.)
And that's just in the space of a few years.
You have no clue what you're talking about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Manufacturing was exported to China, not Russia, so they are more cautious about using China as the bogyman.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Hey, Putinsucker: did you notice the indictments that were just handed down today? 13 of your fucking so-called "bogeymen" now face federal charges -- and that's just the beginning.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
That'd be from the Mueller investigation, led, of course, by Robert Mueller, who was appointed FBI Director by noted left-wing liberal George W Bush.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
The head of the FBI is Trump appointee Christopher Wray, who Trump said is "a man of impeccable credentials." Wray himself says that the Republican House memo is false and misleading.
The renewal of the Carter Page FISA warrant was done by Rod Rosenstein, the Deputy Attorney General appointed by Trump. He worked on Ken Starr’s Whitewater investigation into Bill and Hillary’s real estate dealings.
Rosenstein wrote the memo for Trump that Trump used to fire James Comey. Comey is a registered Republican who served in the Bush Administration and donated to the Presidential campaigns of John McCain and Mitt Romney.
All 11 FISA judges were appointed by Republican appointee John Roberts
The left really stacked the deck there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
And probably swung the 2016 election to Trump.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"The election is rigged!" "You won." "...I did? Well then, the election was totally above board!"
Trump when he said that the election was rigged against him and then laughed at him when he said that he would contest the results.
The funny thing is as soon as he said that he shot his own foot and basically barred himself from claiming otherwise(or at least he would have were he honest). Claiming that the only way you could possibly lose is if the election is rigged opens the door to that very same accusation used against you, that of people pointing out that you yourself said the system was compromised so how are they to trust that you didn't benefit from that?
(And of course there's the ongoing investigation that seems to come up with new evidence supporting the idea of foreign interference on a semi-regular basis.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
You must read only the uniformly biased "mainstream media" -- not even The Drudge Report.
Actually, Trump's State Of The Union went over well, the "economy" is reasonably well claimed to be okay (even the MSM aren't yelling about homeless and poverty), and opinion polls support that the MSM, again, has simply over-reached in the false claims that it was Trump colluding with "Russians" when in fact was Clinton / DNC / FBI / Deep State / various paid operatives who simply allege "inside" contacts in Russia though haven't been there for many years.
So basically, you clearly don't even recognize that there are other views, nor that people on "your" side may be going to jail for their crimes.
Weird. Sad. Propaganda bubble.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
There's an old saying, "The only way I can lose this election is if I’m caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy."
The evangelicals have stuck with Donald Trump through multiple wives, "grab her by the pussy", Stormy Daniels, white supremacy, his endorsement of Roy Moore and much much more. The old saying is no longer true.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
You are incorrect - obviously. The economy is not doing well, poverty is still a problem and getting worse as is homelessness. But you knew that and are simply doing your minimum wage tasks of polluting the net with propaganda - good for you, gotta put food on the table somehow. It just gets a bit difficult sometimes I imagine - like when they want to to make up excuses for the murder of 17 people or even worse, claim it is a hoax, has anyone yet made that claim? If not they will soon.
Do you ever pass a homeless vet sitting on the sidewalk and say "thank you for your service"? If so - did they say anything in response? What was it? Because I'm pretty sure it was not a nice response.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reasons
Specifically, ICE has been almost gleefully demonstrating how they are thuggish bullies who are eager to deport as many people as possible.
Same sort of thing happens in the UK - and I guess for the same reasons.
It goes like this:
People in the 1% who live in gated communities have a conscience about refugees from war-torn countries etc and push for more immigration from those countries.
People outside the 1% who actually have to live with the impact of 1) become upset about it - sometimes even justifiably.
Populist politicians capitalise on 2) and introduce "draconian" rules and "targets" for immigration.
Enforcement officials get assessed according to these "targets" and are pressed into enforcing them to the letter (with many unintended consequences).
Very soon no-one who has any common humanity wants to work in immigration enforcement.
It is important to note that everyone in this sequence is at fault in some way - not just the nasty people at the sharp end of it.
Whilst :
why you are so focused on destroying the lives of people who are almost certainly less well off and less privileged than you are, and who are seeking a better way of life.
seems like a reasonable, compassionate, position it is not a practical one becaue simply admitting anyone who seeks that better way of life would destroy it for everyone, including themselves.
There have to be restrictions, and those restrictions have to be enforced but somehow we need to find a way of attracting people with some humanity into the job, and allow them to bend the rules on occasion to cope with the most difficult cases.
In the meantime we need to address the root causes of these problems - to wit the vast inequalities in wealth between rich and poor countries - largely reinforced by the activities of major US corporations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reasons
I find this difficult to believe, perhaps there is some data.
The 99% are to blame for everything, amirite? Divide and conquer has worked for many centuries and continues to be a useful tactic to subvert the wishes of the public by turning them against themselves. Meanwhile the spectacled Daddy war Bucks sips his brandy while smoking fine cigars laughing it up all the way to the lobbyists to get more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reasons
1) Refugees, asylum seekers are all immigrants, but not all immigrants are refugees or asylum seekers. The rich don't have influence over immigration by way of compassion pleas. Immigration is determined by legislation, executive order, and government bureaucracy, often in coordination with the UN and/or other national governments.
2) The other 99%, the regular folks, are not harmed or negatively affected by this supposed more direct "consequence" of a diverse society. Immigrants are just scapegoats for the nationalist populist (similarly the white nationalist lay blame for societal ills on black people, complaining 'haven't we given them enough already?') agenda. It's easier to blame the "others" and whip up a frenzy of political action against a common "enemy". Life is not a zero sum game.
3) Law enforcement is not pressured into anything. They can be as utterly incompetent as any other government entity and we will foolishly keep shoveling money at them, faster the more incompetent. There is no enforcement purpose in destroying life-sustaining emergency supplies supplied by humanitarian groups in remote and perilous desert locations. ICE and CBP are not uniquely cruel and inhumane by comparison to any other law enforcement agency.
4) Allowing conditional immigration to anyone who does not have a violent history, and will not likely need government welfare (barring an emergency) and who wants to make a better life for themselves will not destroy anything. Competition between workers, citizen or immigrant, means that the worker must leverage his personal value to an employer by being better or faster, conceding working conditions such as agreeing to be migratory or taking lower pay, or by acquiring/utilizing an additional skill/service like translating for non-english speaking co-workers, providing reliable transportation, or taking on a managerial role. No one is entitled to a job as a birth right, competition is part of life.
5) Arguing that arbitrary restrictions on immigration are needed because many immigrants come from socialist nations, and that they will either change or influence the electorate to vote democrat and pro-socialist agenda is another straw-man. The only reason immigrants are more democrat is because the democrats aren't hostile towards them. Immigrants from socialist nations are escaping that hell, they know first hand how awful socialism is.
6) Wealth inequalities between rich and poor nations is the fuel for immigration? And US corporations have a share of blame? Huh? I would agree if you said it was US government that has interfered with some nations' ability to flourish, and contributing to refugee crisis. But what are harms do businesses cause? US companies outsource jobs, like manufacturing, to poorer nations which creates economic opportunity for struggling people. Jobs at sweatshops are preferable to starvation and prostitution, as awful as sweatshops seem to first-worlders. Some think trade deficits are a bad thing, thinking it's a zero-sum game that harms the US, so I don't understand how your claim fits in this dynamic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Reasons
1) Red scare-ing over socialism. Stop it. http://on-t-internet.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/venezuela-what-is-going-on-there-why.html
2) Jobs at sweatshops. Why does some poor sod have to take one for the team that the rich may grow richer?
There's a world of difference between healthy competition that benefits us all and a frantic race to the bottom where the Golden Rule applies: he who has the gold makes the rules.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
He's a filthy piece of shit and a disgrace to anyone in law enforcement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
How did we get to a place where enforcing our law is considered being heartless and a bad human being?
Didn't work as a defence at Nurenberg.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Any of that stuff sound like good law enforcement to you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So, this asshat will be given immunity?
... Figures.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
No, FIRST you state exactly what right illegal immigrants have to invade MY country.
You even KNOW it argues for getting illegal immigrants OUT of the country before they have time to put down roots, try to get ahead of the obvious solution!
In any case, I'm NOT going elsewhere, you don't get a little walled garden in which to spew your hate of America, masnicks.
You put the alleged rights of illegal immigrants over those of citizens and the country to control borders, while vilifying agency and agents with Techdirt's characteristic abundance of pejoratives. I like the clear stance.
The usual rabid anti-Americanism came out! -- It's okay to vilify the entire country over one corrupt lawyer, but pro-Americans must not resent the invasion of millions, eh?
Seems most of the frequent commenters at Techdirt aren't even Americans! You have NO say in MY country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
Why should he? He;'s never claimed anything of the sort, only that they don't magically lose human rights and the right granted to them by your laws just because they don't have documented permission to be there.
Once again, you only have something to say by lying about the world around you. What a sad pathetic life you lead.
"Seems most of the frequent commenters at Techdirt aren't even Americans! You have NO say in MY country."
Actually, dickhead, the First Amendment of the US constitution gives me that right 100%. Ignorant xenophobes such as yourself do seem to get very confused about your own laws for some reason.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
But you don't have it in the "Kingdom" which owns you, serf.
So YOU have power in MY country, eh? By what right, since you aren't even a person where you live?
Is accurate: you can SAY what you want, but don't have any (legal, actual) power other than whatever persuasion on Americans.
And you aren't going to persuade the majority to let in unlimited illegals.
But THANKS for exampling the rabid, arrogant, anti-Americanism I stated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
"And you aren't going to persuade the majority to let in unlimited illegals."
Again, nobody has said they want to, least of all me.
Do you not get tired of lying?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
No, FIRST you state exactly what right illegal immigrants have to invade MY country.
Didn't work for the Native Americans....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
In any case, I'm NOT going elsewhere, you don't get a little walled garden
The line taken by Techdirt isn't always perfect - but those of us who want a rational discussion are dismayed when this kind of irrational nonsense is the major contrary voice.
Then the comments column fills up with "me too" type dismissal and everything else is buried.
Please can everyone just ignore these comments. Don't respond - don't even click the report button - it just gives him something to complain about.
(Me too in the Zantac rather than Harvey Weinstein sense of the words)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
That's all I've ever asked -- comments not hidden -- and which Techdirt is obliged to afford by way of the forms contract, lack of rights reserved, and general opinion, I mean common law, that this is a discussion forum, not a false partisan front which only tolerates one view.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
"That's all I've ever asked -- comments not hidden"
You could easily solve that by not being an insufferable liar. Give it a shot, you might be shocked by the results!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
The report button was put in originally for genuine spam.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
The problem is, every other viable solution I've seen discussed would require people to log in in order to comment, and Mike has repeatedly stated he's against this. I can't think of any better solution that would enable people to identify and not see the comments from deliberate idiots, but also allow people to post without having to create an account. If there is one to be suggested, I'm sure it would be considered.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Flag and move on
Have you seen some of the recent comment sections? Whether he/she's flagged or not he/she still dumps comment after comment(where they differs from Hamilton when that individual was around is that blue at least doesn't tend to reply to their own comments). Whether their comments are reported or not they're still going to spam the comment section, at least by flagging them they don't take up so much space and don't distract from comments left by others as much.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
It is to laugh - Daffy Duck
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
Sheesh. You claim to be rational and then trot out the old saw that Stone Age savages have rights, besides that invaders weren't going to leave them and the riches alone. -- No, you don't have rights in isolation: takes a whole civilization to support rights. But the rights of Americans are under attack by uncivilized foreigners who won't even assimilate into the wonderful system, but want to bring their own flawed theocracies and other authoritarian systems here.
Again, America has always welcomed a reasonable number of even Irish -- one of them my own grandmother, but that doesn't mean we must accept all the drunken Irish louts that find beer is more plentiful here and they aren't ruled by inbred descendants of German robber-barons.
And by the way, you are arguing my view, that informed rational people SHOULD and MUST resist unlimited invasions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
Given that Canada has had refugees crossing our border by the thousands from the US over the last year or so, we have every right to comment on your immigration policy. 15,000 just in the first half of last year, many of them in the US legally but seeing the writing on the wall.
Given that ICE (in its earlier INS incarnation) has been responsible for kidnapping and torturing Canadians, we have every right to comment on them too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
Actually, you have NO "rights", you are SERFS of the inbred chinless wonders who descend from German robber-barons.
Fix your own problems, we'll tend to ours.
YOU complain that US policies are driving people into Canada, eh? -- WHAT'S THE PROBLEM? WELCOME THEM WITH HUGS AND FREE GOODIES! -- See, YOU just admitted that large numbers of immigrants ARE a problem.
Silly Canadian. Petarded with your own hoist!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
Canadians are citizens. We have all the rights that Americans have. Even your Cato Institute ranks Canada higher than the US on their Human Freedom Index.
The royals are ceremonial. On paper they have power, but only with the understanding that don't use it. Canadians are horrified by the thought of dropping the monarchy, but only because of the inevitable bickering over who would replace them on the currency. It'll be like a Trump/Cruz/Hillary debate lasting for years.
Welcome folks with hugs and free goodies, and they tend to be good friends. The US was built on large numbers of immigrants.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
HA, HA! -- Oh, you've been indoctrinated with that falsehood since birth and it soothes your feelings to believe, though also know full well that:
A) "the royals" have veto power over all laws in Canada too
B) the Kingdom has TWO classes, and YOU are in the LOWER class
C) "the royals" STILL own about 30 percent of the land in Britain
D) "the royals" STILL have overwhelming control of ALL that goes on in the "Kingdom"; there's an entire army division dedicated to protecting the (one) person and family
E) There's only ONE person in the whole UK who can operate a private car on the roads without being licensed, and that's the monarch, because OWNS the roads. PERIOD.
F) You are DISARMED serfs, DO NOT HAVE INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO OWN AND KEEP FIREARMS. That's the KEY point of rights. You are too dangerous to be armed. -- Heck, in Britain, they even take away long knives!
What you stated about having rights is lie and illusion -- indeed it's the only view that you are permitted to hold. I'm happy to expose the lie and ruin your illusions too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
On paper, with the understanding that they don't use it. They could override Canadians' wishes once, but that power would quickly be gone.
Nope. Just one class in Canada. We stopped allowing the monarch to grant knighthoods, baronetcies, and peerages almost a century ago.
The Canadian government owns a similar percentage in Canada. It's sometimes called "crown land", but again that's a ceremonial thing. Legally it's "public land" and not owned by the monarch. Likewise, the US federal government owns 28% of US land.
Also military drivers, because in theory they get their orders from the queen. (There's a funny story there....) But again, in theory. It's the Canadian military handing out the orders. The queen is a ceremonial figurehead. Legal power which would quickly disappear if she ever tried to wield it.
Incorrect on all points. We have stricter controls on handguns, but you can own them.
Consider the Quebec man who killed a cop and disabled another with his handgun in his home because he legitimately believed he was about to be killed by armed robbers. (No-announce search warrant in the middle of the night). Found not guilty. Try that in America. They'd have given him the electric chair.
Again, even your right-wing Cato institute ranks Canada higher than the US on its Human Freedom Index.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
Your bigoted, hateful self is showing. I pity you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
Masnick tries to condemn the whole US of A over what one LAWYER does. I simply point out -- perhaps a little too slyly -- that condemning groups for actions of one is wrong.
Not bigoted, not hateful, just using Masnick's technique.
Thanks for the pity, though! (Actually, I'm pretty sure that you mean "despise", as "pity" means sympathy and well-wishing.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
I do not feel this way, why do you attempt to speak on my behalf? I never asked for that and ask that you stop doing so in the future. You do not speak for me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
while vilifying agency and agents with Techdirt's characteristic abundance of pejoratives
Vilifying agency and agents with pejorative? You mean like the small-handed orange retard does on a daily basis?
Yeah, you can stick that comment right up your self-righteous ass, there dipshit. Keep on proving exactly how stupid you low-IQ voters really are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Why do you think anyone has said they should be? Most of what's written is about problems with the way they're being enforced, not the laws themselves.
It is interesting, however, that people are coming in here to spout off about Mike daring to correctly state that illegal immigrants have rights, rather than having problems with the criminal activities associated with the ICE agents. You're so offended by people being there without permission (usually a civil violation) that you'll happily support criminals and assume they are deporting people correctly because of the badge they wear. It's rather fascinating.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
Umm, great. "Illegals" have rights by virtue of violating the law, eh? And the US of A has NO right to control its borders?
Even better smear is "happily support criminals" -- NO, WE DON'T! Severe problem with ONE lawyer committing CRIMES has been found and is being dealt with. He'll get a fair trial and then, I hope, go to jail for years.
And YOU have the infernal gall to complain about people lying, eh? You just smeared the entire country, and feel virtuous about it, way you serfs do when allowed to attack the US of A, though you don't dare criticize your own illegal hereditary rulers.
Rave on some more hate at the US of A, serf, you're allowed that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
No, they have rights by virtue of being human beings and by virtue of your constitution granting them those rights. You fascists just don't get to strip those rights away because you believe they didn't get the correct paperwork.
"And the US of A has NO right to control its borders?"
So, what is it that keep causing you to hallucinate people saying things they didn't say? Is it too many drugs, or not enough?
"Even better smear is "happily support criminals" -- NO, WE DON'T!"
Then why the desperate flailing attempts to put the focus on something else other than the criminal discussed in the story? There's nothing to say that you can';t be critical of both the criminals in ICE and the actions of the illegal immigrants, so if you're that eager to distract attention you must support the criminals in some way?
"You just smeared the entire country"
I didn't, but even if I did that's what free speech is, I could say that if I wish. You do really seem to oppose your own First Amendment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
Who's been stripped of rights in this? (Except by actions of one lawyer?)
YOU don't get to strip away the right of the US of A to control its borders against foreign invaders just because you believe that WE -- but not Israel -- must allow in everyone who wants to come ruin our swell country.
> Then why the desperate flailing attempts to put the focus on something else other than the criminal discussed in the story?
You don't at all question those who widened this into the typical Techdirt hate on US of A fest before I even commented. -- Why the attempt to divert from the immigration policies of other countries? You don't want to compare and see how the US stacks up?
The US found a criminal who'll likely be punished. We're still semi-moral and don't let criminals run wild, especially not those who start by flouting our laws by entering without permission.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
Nobody. But, there sure seem to be a lot of people like yourself who would prefer if immigrants didn't have the rights they've been afforded. Sorry, they still get things like due process even if their presence offends you.
"YOU don't get to strip away the right of the US of A to control its borders against foreign invaders "
Good thing I'm not trying to, then. Again, what is it that's causing you to imagine a different discussion to the one in front of you? Are the things people are actually saying too accurate for you, so you have to erect a handy strawman to dismantle instead?
"Why the attempt to divert from the immigration policies of other countries?"
It's not on topic. If you started bitching about Linux in a discussion of Apple's policies or started talking about Volkswagen in a discussion of Honda's legal team, I'd also tell you to talk about the subject at hand.
Here, it's the criminal activity of American government employees, so Israeli policy doesn't enter the discussion, even if your favourite fascist supporters have written a story ab out it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
FIRST YOU SMEAR AND ACCUSE:
To which I asked "Who's been stripped of rights in this?"
And you now reply: "Nobody. But, there sure seem"
You just admitted that you were fabricating harm.
You repeatedly use the word "fascist" when know full well that I oppose corporatism, ALL lawyers, and fully support the US Constitution.
You try going on to: "Here, it's the criminal activity of American government employees, so Israeli policy doesn't enter the discussion, even if your favourite fascist supporters have written a story ab out it."
It's ONE gov't employee, in the news precisely because caught. You are LYING with the plural.
I compared on-topic with far worse implications, and you explicitly do NOT care when it's Israel.
Then another "fascist" charge.
IF this site were fair as pretends, then YOUR comments right here would be voted down and hidden.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
No, I stated that people like you openly wish that they didn't have rights. Which they have in every recent thread that the subject has been discussed in.
Look, I know reading is really hard for you, but it helps when you don't invent your own narrative while doing so.
"You repeatedly use the word "fascist" when know full well that I oppose corporatism, ALL lawyers, and fully support the US Constitution."
None of that precludes you having fascist tendencies, especially given your choice of news sources. The cesspit you wallow in, judging by the links you spam, is full of them.
"It's ONE gov't employee"
There's multiple instances mentioned in the story, even though there is only one person involved in the main case being discussed. I'm referring to the wider context, not whichever part of the story your tiny mind decided was the most important.
"I compared on-topic with far worse implications, and you explicitly do NOT care when it's Israel."
I also don't care about a couple of hundred other countries when the discussion is not about one of them. The real question is why you're suddenly so obsessed with the policies of Israel when the discussion is specifically about the US.
"Then another "fascist" charge."
Yes, the Daily Mail openly and publicly supported fascists before WWII, and I've seen no evidence that their tendencies have changed any, only that they're better at doing it with subtlety. If you're still confused, Might I suggest you research your news stories before blindly posting everything they say that you agree with - they're often lying to you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
It's been very clearly established by SC cases that rights of persons start AFTER the border.
YOU nor anyone has a right to cross the US border without permission.
Anyone crossing the border without permission is thereby a criminal, with reduced "rights".
> Yes, the Daily Mail openly and publicly supported fascists before WWII
So did what's his name, the one who abdicated -- in favor of an American divorcee, that's how HOT they are -- but in reality because he was so sympathetic to Nazis that couldn't be supported. -- Those inbred chinless wonders still sometimes get caught dressing like Nazis!
But keep on proving that you hate America -- while claiming rights under its very generous establishing document. That's one of the contradictions inherent in this area.
Another is that you advocate a policy guaranteed to destroy that freedom under hordes of criminals.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
Yes, and we are discussing the rights of people who have already crossed the border. Your point?
"Anyone crossing the border without permission is thereby a criminal, with reduced "rights"."
Citation needed. Most illegal immigration isn't even in violation of criminal law, just civil.
"Those inbred chinless wonders still sometimes get caught dressing like Nazis!"
OK, so again what's your point? You don't like some Nazi and fascist supporters, so that makes it OK for you to get your news from other fascist supporters?
"But keep on proving that you hate America"
I don't. I do hate liars and fascists, but Americans who aren't in those groups are usually fine by me. If only you'd stop lying about me...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
https://qz.com/1190856/israel-to-pay-civilians-to-arrest-african-migrants-and-refugees/
"Israel offers to pay tens of thousands of African migrants to leave within 90 days or face jail after Netanyahu said their presence is 'a threat to the country's Jewish character'"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5231587/Israel-offers-pay-African-migrants- leave-threatens-jail.html
But it's okay if you're Jewish, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
...Israeli migration enforcement. Yes, they do. Again, you seem confused about the nature of this site, it's certainly not a place to discus minutae of every single piece of international immigration law.
Though, it is interesting that you felt you had to distract from the criminal activity of your government agents with babbling about another country's immigration policies. It's also funny that you picked the Daily Heil as support for an anti-Israel stance, given their support of literal fascists and Nazi sympathisers in the run up to WWII.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
No, I'm not. It's anti-American.
> Though, it is interesting that you felt you had to distract from the criminal activity of your government agents with babbling about another country's immigration policies.
You foreigners barge in here screaming over MY gov't agents, who will almost certainly be punished by the way, and YOU foreigners assert a right from one person's bad acts to condemn the entire US of A for rational immigration policy, but when I extend the notion, it's out of bounds to criticize another country, eh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
Not really, unless you think that "anti-American" means "not licking the jackboots of government agents even when they're breaking your own laws and violating human rights". In which case, I guess they'd be proudly so.
"You foreigners barge in here screaming over MY gov't agents"
Yes, as is my right to do so. You do seem to have a real problem with people exercising their rights, don't you?
"it's out of bounds to criticize another country, eh?"
No, you can do that all you want. You'd be better served picking a relevant venue, reliable sources and acting like a sane adult while doing so, but you can criticise other countries (and often do, usually with lies, but still...)
It's just funny that you're so desperate to do so when the criminal activities of your country are under discussion, and even funnier that you pick known liars and former (?) fascist anti-semite supporters to make your case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
It's NOT criminal to control borders -- not with any stated tactics, only the opinion and innuendo of masnicks who want unlimited immigration, which NO country permits. You again simply use this one lawyer to attack the whole country.
It's not diversion to give an on-topic link, but it IS diversion to start claiming I make a diversion instead of YOU making on-topic comment.
You dissolve into quote-and-contradict, while avoiding doing anything useful to solve problems in the "Kingdom" which owns you.
By the way, do you know that the UK and Europe are also under attack by waves of immigrants, many of them almost literaly shipped in by globalist politicians in order to ruin and split the host countries? -- It's true. Been on teh internets for months.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
It is if you commit criminal activity while doing so, as the subject of the article did.
Please, do keep up rather than inventing a fantasy version of the discussion in your head.
"It's not diversion to give an on-topic link"
Then why did you paste two that are clearly off-topic?
"By the way, do you know that the UK and Europe are also under attack by waves of immigrants"
They're not. Not at the levels claimed by the known liars at the Daily Mail and the Express, anyway. We can deal with it, and do so without violating the rights of the people who get here.
"many of them almost literaly shipped in by globalist politicians in order to ruin and split the host countries"
Do you have any non-fiction evidence? Most of your reading material seems to come from the fantasy aisle.
"Been on teh internets for months."
So has the new Star Trek series, that doesn't mean it's a documentary.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
I wrote: "It's NOT criminal to control borders"
You reply: "It is if you commit criminal activity while doing so, as the subject of the article did."
This is your typical truism and expansive paraphrase.
First, illegal immigrants commit criminal activity by that very act which merits the name. Ever think of that?
2nd, you CANNOT deny, so simply deflect and divert. It's all you have. I'm happy to see you go on, but you're not even arguing now, just paraphrase-and-rant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
Pot, meet kettle.
You just want desperately to have reality fit your own way of thinking. Sorry dude, borders can and should be protected but agents caught committing crimes while "protecting" them should be prosecuted. Simple as that. All the rest of your ramblings that nobody is discussing right now have absolutely zero relation to the topic (even if they are delusional as well). Funny thing, you'd be wrong even if you were on topic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lou Reed had ICE's number almost thirty years ago
that's what the Statue of Bigotry says
Your poor huddled masses, let's club 'em to death
get it over with and just dump 'em on the boulevard"
--- "Dirty Blvd.", Lou Reed, from "New York", 1989
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Lou Reed had ICE's number almost thirty years ago
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Lou Reed had ICE's number almost thirty years ago
Your poor huddled masses, let's club 'em to death
I thought he was talking about Canadians and seals at that point...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A parallax view, in case anybody is interested.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Jeffrey Nonken"
Yes, I noticed just today YOUR name on The Register!
A "JohnFen" appeared there too, long since left this cesspit -- even when I wasn't here, kids! Masnick's "Democrat" notions ran him off, my bet.
Wrong word, "parallax" -- unless you meant an "error in observation".
But it's not actually different. For perspective, you could try even the relatively neutral Drudge Report", which links to the rather large site, Zero Hedge -- and not to tiny little Techdirt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Most here
And, BTW, for those who are dissing Trump on this, the criminal activities went on for years during the Obama administration and wasn't detected, investigated, and indicted until Trump became POTUS.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Most here
That means that either they have become more brazen due to Trump being president, or we are taking a harder look at what happens during immigration because of Trump's nationalist sentiments.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
and what has been done to stop it? nothing? yeah, thought so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Nice way to pat yourself on the back for your first word comment. Ego much?
Um. I didn't do that. The FW/LW choices are done by insiders who choose them. If it were up to me, that would not be up there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I believe I know which one you're talking about, and my guess would be that it wasn't 'removed', it was simply flagged enough times to be minimized, and minimized comments don't show up as First Words. Simply a matter of how the system is set up, nothing to do with 'the opinion is espoused.'
As for this First Word, it's simply because someone with a FW credit found that part of the article good enough to post and then make as the first word. As for seeing it as 'if you don't agree with me go away', that's certainly not how I read it, I saw/see it as simply 'if you're going to comment on something that's been dubunked multiple times, do it somewhere else and don't waste everyone's time here.'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Analysis: Most Immigrants Arrested by Ice Have Prior Convictions"
http://freebeacon.com/issues/analysis-immigrants-arrested-ice-prior-convictions/
"74 percent of those arrested by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency in FY2017 had past criminal convictions, according to a new analysis from the Pew Research Center."
"The remainder of those arrested by ICE were further broken down by those with pending criminal charges-16 percent of the total-and those with no criminal charges-just 11 percent of the total."
SEVENTY-FOUR PERCENT are repeating criminals NOT due every last nicety.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Analysis: Most Immigrants Arrested by Ice Have Prior Convictions"
They're not saying that 74% of immigrants are criminals. They're saying that of those who are, 74% are repeat offenders.
How does that compare with non-immigrant arrestees?
Wikipedia: Recidivism: United States:
So immigrants are about average then.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "Analysis: Most Immigrants Arrested by Ice Have Prior Convictions"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: "Analysis: Most Immigrants Arrested by Ice Have Prior Convictions"
When I've read the stories here about the steep fees charged for prison phone use, I have to wonder if they're deliberately trying to isolate prisoners from those who would support and encourage them upon release. Driving up the recidivism rates and profit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Analysis: Most Immigrants Arrested by Ice Have Prior Convictions"
It wasn't what anyone, but your xenophobic mind, would call an actual crime... but he beeds to be thrown out to appease your ego.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"Big Internet Comment" is also a characteristic of extinct troll bob, who regularly appended "Big" in front of groups and industries he intrinsically disagrees with.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]